Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad?

It's been a rollercoaster two weeks since the Pennsylvania primary.  This diary is just a sharing of some honest thoughts from me, an unapologetic Hillary supporter.  I'm not trying to change anyone's mind on anything, just looking to see what other people are feeling behind the "official" story.  

Today just felt so wrong.  I can't quite place why, so I'm writing a bit in a stream-of-consciousness style.  By all pre-April 22 standards, Hillary didn't do bad at all.  In fact, she legitimately did overperform.  Two weeks ago, I remember after the PA primary finished, some TV pundits gestured to the map and said "we reconvene again in two weeks for Indiana and North Carolina!"

I got a pit in my stomach.  It occurred to me that we were very likely to see a narrow loss in Indiana and a blow-out loss in North Carolina.  I knew West Virginia and Kentucky would help patch things bigtime afterwards but worried that losing Indiana and NC would end her string of high profile wins.  All spring, I knew North Carolina was bad news.  I'd seen the polls and knew that while Hillary tended to perform her final poll averages in most states, the polls in the deep South tended to drastically underestimate Obama support.  I genuinely figured it would be like RCP average finishes at +18% Obama and then the result would be +30% Obama, making it close to Virginia and Georgia.  I knew it wouldn't be quite as bad as VA or GA so in my gut I shaved a few Obama points off (30% instead of 35%) but still thought it would be just awful.  I also knew North Carolina had a huge growing population and a mixed primary, meaning deep down I expected and feared a 350,000 popular vote boost to Obama.

I also thought, on April 22, that Hillary might lose Indiana.  When we look at a set of polls, we digest them in a way where we mix them somewhat with what we know about the state's past voting behavior, its demographics, and some other things.  So the result is a lot more art than science; it's not scientifically possible to predict races.  I thought to myself, "Damn.  I think Hillary's in real danger of losing Indiana by 5 points."  

So fast forward to today.  Hillary wins Indiana by 2%.  Obama's margin in North Carolina is less than half of what he accumulated in neighboring Virginia and Georgia.  If you told me this on April 22, I would have been elated.  "Yay!  The big North Carolina monster is off the map and she managed that crucial split decision and won the 'tie-breaker' in Indiana!"

So that happened.

But it felt so awful.  The whole night.  Really.

I guess I figured months ago that the big NC loss was a foregone conclusion so all eyes would be on Indiana.  Instead, the whole evening, all I heard about was Obama's glamorous "decisive" victory in North Carolina.  He gave a spectacular speech where he seemed reinvigorated.  As a partisan, of course I felt better when my candidate's opponent seemed frustrated, tired, and annoyed.  But his speech was really good.  His energy was on.  I found him likable and frankly I ususally don't.  

In Hillary's Pennsylvania speech she used a line to the effect of "this election isn't about me.  This isn't my victory.  This is YOUR victory."  It was an incredible line.  

And there it was.  Again.  But this time in Obama's speech.  And since his victory was declared first, he set the agenda by saying it first.  When Hillary used the same line in her speech, it looked like she was just copying Obama, even though it was her line.  

And what was up with Hillary speech?  Obama's looked like it came from Yankee Stadium (venue, crowd) and Hillary's looked like it came from a high school basement.  The energy was so sad too.  She vowed to fight on.  And she finally publicized the Michigan/Florida issue I've been trying to raise the profile of here on MyDD.  Her comment about deciding elections on only 48 states made me and my friends cheer louder than anything she said.  And I said, "wow that sounds like she borrowed one of my talking points."  :-)  

But...

Lori, who posts here, is right.  Something about the speech, despite all the language to the contrary, felt like a concession speech.  

All the words aside and all of the math which I know is not as unfavorable to her as the media suggests aside, it felt like the sadness of a concession speech.  

And now she isn't appearing in public tomorrow.  I'm really sad.

And yet logically, she's not falling behind the trajectory I had in mind for her in mid-April.  Win in PA, narrow win in Indiana, blow out loss in NC, big wins in KY, WV, PR, tossup in OR, and ?? in MT/SD, then seating of MI/FL and sense of momentum affecting superdelegates.  In fact, the weakest link was the Indiana win and she secured that.  And her loss in North Carolina was much smaller than I expected.

So why did it feel like such a bad night?

Maybe I set my expectations too high with what seemed to be a huge gust of momentum after Pennsylvania.  She was in top form campaigning.  Obama lost 8 points in his national RCP.  He seemed tired and curt.  Wright came out again.  She started getting a few superdelegates.  McCain passed out Obama in head-to-heads.  Her electability argument was slowly growing.

So in my gut, I thought we were headed to a +10% win in Indiana and a single digit loss in North Carolina.  A lot of polls were confirming this.  

The actual results are above my expectations on April 22, but they're very below my expectations from this weekend.  She's still very capable of winning mathematically but it feels like she's lost... She looked like the face of old politics that a new rising generation wants to cast off like a nagging parent.  And I say this as a 27 year old male!    

Despite all the merits on her arguments (which are strong), I feel like she's coming from a losing position. Sometimes, it doesn't matter what you have to say if no one wants to listen.  I do think she's a little more electable but in matters of perception, something went awry tonight.  I'm not quite sure what.  

I don't think she's going to concede but the rumors of her cancelling appearances and overall feel of her speech and the whole night has thrown me.  And this is against all logic for me because I knew well in advance that she could get trounced in North Carolina and still win the nomination.  She outperformed my pre-Pennsylvania expectations.  

And tonight I expected something ridiculous would come out of Lake County and she'd end up losing, making the night unambiguous in its meaning.  Now that the last results are in, she wins.  

I'm afraid of massive superdelegate rallying around Obama this week.  Rightfully or not, with the media controlling the narrative spin on the Florida/Michigan issue (rather than its merits) and this being a battle of perception rather than election (superdelegates), I don't feel very good after tonight.  

I still support Hillary 100% and want her to win.  I want the Dem. candidate to be legitimate and not be chosen by some weird ploy that counts Guam and American Samoa, but doesn't count Michigan and Florida.  If Obama can win with those contests included, I'll support him.  If he wins but has to exclude two states, I will genuinely be undecided in the fall.  That kind of spurning doesn't go away overnight.  

Maybe a full night of watching pundits talk about a 30% win in West Virginia next week will reset the tone of the race?  I dunno...  

Anyone else feeling similarly?


Poll
The most obnoxious anchor is
Keith Olbermann
Chris Matthews
Andrea Mitchell
Larry King
Sean Hannity
Pat Buchanan

Votes: 52
Results : Vote Link : Polls

Display:


Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 3)

you hit the nail on the head.  the media controls this primary and sadly has contributed to the results.  but im with ya - a v. sad night indeed.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:01:07 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

The saddest part was discovering all along that the DNC itself was working against us and catering to Obama's every wish. Hillary has in no way lost anything. The men are still calling for her to drop outregradless of the incredible Democratic infrastructure she is helping to create - while Obama supporters are claiming it's all their efforts. How about Obama supporters calling people who voted for Hillary gun toting, religion clinging, low information voters who vote against their own best interests. Maybe it was Donna Brazile saying that the only help she got from the Democratic Party was actually from White male Republicans, and that the new Democratic coalition does not need White or Hispanic voters to win the general election.
Barack Obama is my President
by Jeter on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:17:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

BS (2.00 / 2)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:27:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

Excellent point.  I was immersed in the media narrative.

For what it's worth, this was the first time in a while that I watched an election result entirely on TV (cause I was with friends).  Usually I check in online.  

Maybe the "personal" component of hearing live human beings speaking on TV added to the "feeling" that I wouldn't get from just reading numbers and comments on CNN and blogs.

Usually media bias fires me up and I call it out as best as I can, and I feel very secure in my convictions on it.  Today, I noticed the media controlled narrative.  But I felt it was coming at me from so many angles.  Underperformance in Indiana, Obama looking so strong in NC, people laughing at the idea of counting Florida and Michigan...  

I was totally ambushed mentally and in spirit.  And my confidence gave way to resignation.    


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:22:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The media 'pundits' are just looking (2.00 / 1)

at these contests from an intellectual point of view.  Just analyzing numbers, etc.  They aren't considering the emotional investment people have in their candidates so aren't sensitive in what they say.

Ice cream for you!


No Way, No How, No McCain!
by GFORD on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:30:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The media 'pundits' are just looking (2.00 / 2)

I didn't find ice cream but I had two cookies.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:20:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 2)

" the media controls this primary"

last night proved they don't control the primary.   whats the story been for the last 500 hours?  

Pastor Wright & Bittergate

Hillary should have wiped the floor with obama after  the beating he took.  Instead he beat expectations and nearly won IN..   it's the voters that are in control of this primary.


by soros on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:31:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

The media has controlled this country since the 2000 election!  

A win was a big win in IN as Obama himself called it the "tie breaker".  Let us all try to look at the positives.  Whomever wins the Dem nomination, we know which party the MSM will be supporting, and it is not our side!


by mcctx on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:41:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I don't think she will concede (2.00 / 3)

I think there will be a call to reassess and perhaps a trickle of Superdelegates towards Senator Obama.

Tonight's just strange. From beginning to end. The dialogue just shifted from "Will Obama be cornered?" to "Obama is the presumptive nominee" and tonight is "pretty much the end".

But I think she has every right to continue and I won't be calling for her to drop out. I will always call for our candidates to be polite to one another but that's a given.

I hope they both continue and allow the people to decide the nomination on May 20th, when Senator Obama crosses the 50%+1 threshold of Pledged Delegates. And I hope they work together to get the vote out.

And I hope Senator Obama pays of her debts and perhaps seats Florida and Michigan in a show of good will.

I don't know. I think a lot of things.

Tonight's still spinnable.

We'll see in the morning.

For now, though, I know I really want to focus on being cool towards one another again, rather than bristling with anger under the surface in every discussion.


Commissar: Canadian Gal; Proletariat Policemen: ragekage, Lord Hadrian. "For the Proletariat!"
by Lord Hadrian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:02:46 AM EST

personally at this state I just (2.00 / 2)

kinda want to see everyone vote (and yes that includes revotes in FL/MI)


-- be excellent to each other
by kindthoughts on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:03:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't think she will concede (2.00 / 2)

Well... even as a Clinton supporter, I don't think tonight's results are very spinnable. Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but it felt disastrous. Almost every reputable poll out there indicated she'd do better in IN than she ultimately did. There's no way they can spin this effectively.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:18:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Senator Clinton (2.00 / 1)

has the "tiebreaker" narrative she can try. Spin's always possible. We have two talent pols on our hands. But I don't want to engage in it tonight so I'll let those two handle it.

We get caught up in the game of kings sometimes, acting like each of us individually hold the power to make them and that each snipe will bring us closer to that.

We engage in scenarios of victory and defeat; rethinking what could've been done; what we could've done.

Tonight, both parties won and it was a night that's been mellow for me. I'm not taking great pride out of it except that I think both candidates stuck olive branches out for one another and engaged in the politics of unity they've both been talking about.


Commissar: Canadian Gal; Proletariat Policemen: ragekage, Lord Hadrian. "For the Proletariat!"
by Lord Hadrian on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:31:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

I honestly think if there's a defeat to be spoken of tonight, it was a financial one. The Clinton campaign has been cash-strapped and this didn't help.

I can't say much else right now, but all you Clinton folks did pour your hearts into the process, and I hope the fire is still there for electing democrats moving forward, and I'm not just talking about the presidential race. We have a whole lot of cleaning up to do, and we need a majority to last us a while.

Once again, congrats all around, everyone deserves it.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:04:55 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

Hmmm.

I know I wouldn't personally mind if the Clintons loaned the campaign more money.  WV and KY are cheap markets.  And frankly, their personal finances could dry up tomorrow and it wouldn't affect me.  I'm only affected by their status as possible elected officials.  I mean, I wish them the best in fortune and all, but their personal wealth is not my personal wealth if that makes sense.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:18:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

I was mostly talking about campaign finances. It would be nice to be able to get the $5 million back, but the concern must be to pay the debt the campaign already has.

As for loaning herself more money, don't think that'll happen.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:28:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

I'm glad you say you will support Obama if he wins after FL and MI are counted, but I think you need to acknowledge that the maths is there for Obama now to allow them to be counted, and he still wins.  It really is all over - there is no argument to be made to the supers, and I think you are correct that they go on mass to Obama this week.  Also, I'm pleased you liked his speech - maybe in a few weeks you will start to see some other things you like about him.  I hope so.  Good luck.


by interestedbystander on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:09:21 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

If the math is there, then it's there.

If he wins by a count that includes Michigan and Florida, then he wins legitimately.  

And then we need a better schedule in 2012, and NO CAUCUSES.  If someone supports Obama now it might be natural to think that they're good things, but years from now, you may be on the opposite side of the divide and see how frustrating it is to have so many delegates allocated based on a slim minority of the population.  And there's so little oversight the potential for fraud and coercion is staggering.  

2012: all primaries and some system that rotates which states have the early influences, with due concern for the need for lesser known candidates to have some low cost media markets.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:15:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

I get your issue with caucuses, and it's a legit argument. But how can the DNC mandate that state governments foot the bill for contests? That's what primaries are. When the state party foots the bill for an election it's called a firehouse primary or unassembled caucus


Senator Obama will be formally nominated on August 28, 2008 - the 45th Anniversary of Dr. King's "I Have A Dream Speech."
by brimur on Wed May 07, 2008 at 08:10:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I can relate to that. (2.00 / 1)

It did seem like a concession speech. And something about the look on Bill's face -- he looked miserable. Chelsea, too... there was something different. And Hillary's tone -- not what I'm accustomed to.

You're right, it felt terrible. I put far too much faith in SUSA. They screwed up, big time.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:14:42 AM EST

Re: I can relate to that. (2.00 / 2)

You're right.  Maybe it was her attention on the Democratic Party rather than on herself.  That kind of showed something.  

As much as they say Obama is the candidate who inspires passion and enthusiasm, I have grown to admire and LOVE Hillary this year in ways I never did previously.  I even love the "Celestial Choirs" video where she gets all sarcastic.  

<3's for Hillary.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:17:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I can relate to that. (2.00 / 0)

I think Bill's face was most telling.  He looked glum as if at a funeral.  He's been around long enough, as has she, to know it's over.

I have to say, though I started out as Edwards, then when he was gone, was disgusted with Obama and Clinton, I began to sort of like underdog Clinton.  Underdog Clinton was a lot more likeable than frontrunner "I deserve the nomination because I do" Clinton.  I wonder if she had run that way from the beginning if things would be different for her?


by reggie44pride on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:46:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I know just how you feel. (2.00 / 1)

As an Obama supporter I felt the same way after PA even though I knew in advance he would lose.  I guess it's just a letdown from thinking we were underestimating our candidate's success.

After PA, I swore I would spend a whole day in bed eating ice cream.  Didn't do it but I just moped around all day...actually several days.

As for Hillary's speech tonight...there was something off about it.  It seemed kind of disjointed, like she made some points but they didn't flow together very well.  Does that make sense?  And then when she thanked Bill and Chelsea, it seemed like the credits at the end of a movie or something...surprised me.  Has she done that before after a primary?

Obama...well, he just won a big victory in SC so of course he was energized and so was his audience.  No surprise there.

Anyway, if you have ice cream it might be a good time to dive in.  ;~)


No Way, No How, No McCain!
by GFORD on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:15:20 AM EST

Re: I know just how you feel. (2.00 / 3)

Ate an entire pint earlier, which is something I never do. Feel a bit queasy now, to be honest.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:20:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I know just how you feel. (2.00 / 2)

I ate a French silk pie.  I'm not even kidding.


John McCain smells like mothballs.
by asherrem on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:23:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I know just how you feel. (none / 0)

I had no idea Obama supporters were upset by the PA loss.  I really thought y'all expected a 15% loss and we're happy with NINE POINT TWO which does NOT EQUAL TEN.  ;-)  Maybe you guys were just frontin'.

"As for Hillary's speech tonight...there was something off about it.  It seemed kind of disjointed, like she made some points but they didn't flow together very well.  Does that make sense?"

Yes.  It makes perfect sense.  She had her grace for the party moments and then her MI/FL moments, but even with MI/FL, it seemed like she was also really just doing it as a cause for the party, not as a tactic to win.  I mean, whether one supports either candidate, we all know it looks bad to have a winner picked by only 48 states.  Especially when you count Puerto Rico instead of Florida and Democrats Abroad instead of Michigan.  

Her speech was forward looking and then backward looking and when she thanked Bill and Chelsea, it wasn't for their hard work in Indiana... it was more like a total thank you for their hard work on the whole campaign.  Ending credits.  

But she does thank them in most of her speeches, that's not new.

Obama's speech after PA was really bad (especially since it came from Indiana) but... it didn't have that sadness to it.  It was uninspired but it wasn't SAD the way this speech was.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:24:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 2)

I wish I could recommend your diary, because your honesty is refreshing. If Alegre's post-Indiana diary contained even a hint of the disappointment you describe, the amount of gloating from Obama supporters would drop dramatically.

Anyway, don't put too much stock in what the media is saying right now. No matter what the eventual outcome, Hillary has nothing to be embarrassed about tonight. She fought hard and won in Indiana. She kept Obama from declaring a two-state victory. That counts for something at this stage of the campaign.


by jdusek on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:17:19 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

Hey, I Recommended it for you.

Of course, I guess that means that someone else will have to Recommend it for me, or something like that.


by Ray Radlein on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:08:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

Thank you.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:25:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Aw, BPK, I really liked your diary. (2.00 / 3)

It really touched me.

I can sympathize.  I had that pit in my stomach and my heart hurt during New Hampshire and Nevada.  And then I felt it again during Ohio.

I hope this doesn't add insult to injury because I'm just trying to offer my perspective.  I think she lost it in February.  Not officially, but that was where Obama got his lead.  She wasn't prepared to compete in the February contests because she didn't think she would have to.  By the time she got her campaign back on track, it was too late.  The math just isn't there for her to come back.  I know you're trying to push FL and MI, but even with them, she still can't win.  She can come close, but she still will not overtake his lead.

I congratulate you guys on a hard-fought win in Indiana.  I know all Obama supporters are jealous of that so it is something to be proud of.  But she needed to have a big win to offset his delegate lead, and that just did not materialize.

I thought it was funny that you're a 27 year old male.  I am a 27 year old female.  Could we be more diametrically opposed?


by The Distillery on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:17:34 AM EST

Re: Aw, BPK, I really liked your diary. (2.00 / 1)

"I think she lost it in February.  Not officially, but that was where Obama got his lead.  She wasn't prepared to compete in the February contests because she didn't think she would have to."

Hillary's campaign suffered from major overconfidence.  The temptation to ignore pesky microscopic details and aim for those sweeping peremptory big-state wins was hard for them to resist.  They banked on the easy-wins.  Like, "Look you guys, why bother with all of that work when you can just win California and New York and wipe out everyone else's totals!"

I know they didn't plan for February.  It was obvious.  I never liked her campaign team.

I like her new guy, Garin.  Hillary started being human in March.  And she became ridiculously likable.  She was humorous and sassy and adorable in her sudden underdog-ness.  

Barack got overconfident in March.  There's never any motivation to work hard for something you believe is already yours.  Both Hillary and Barack suffered from that listlessness at different points.  

"I know you're trying to push FL and MI, but even with them, she still can't win."

That's all the more reason for their inclusion to be a bipartisan cause.  FL & MI have been enormous looming issues swept under the rug and the interplay between the initial ruling, the current rules, and the appellate procedure is both poorly misunderstood and I would argue actively misrepresented by some parties.  

"But she needed to have a big win to offset his delegate lead, and that just did not materialize."

I only differ slightly.  The goal was never to offset the pledged delegate lead, but to show increased momentum such that would both sway SD's and precipitate the resolution of MI/FL.  MI/FL is the biggest trove of delegates out there for Hillary.  Including them would show a real tie and erase the meme of "overturning the will of the voters" as expressed in either PD's or PV.  

That's why Indiana feels so bad.  No one really expected a +30 pledged delegate swing from Indiana.  What the campaign is going for is persuasive appeal to SD's and clout to seat FL/MI.  That's why tonight, the defeat on the numbers isn't all that bad (actually better than I projected in April), it's the defeat in subjective perception that she so needed.

"I thought it was funny that you're a 27 year old male.  I am a 27 year old female.  Could we be more diametrically opposed?"

It's not the time yet for happiness and hugs and "oh wow, I love that movie too!"  I'm not sure where this race is headed.  If Hillary regroups and somehow she has a chance, I follow her.  

My loyalty doesn't change overnight.

rawr


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:39:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw, BPK, I really liked your diary. (none / 0)

I never liked her campaign team.

As I said over on Great Orange Satan tonight:

Male, female, black, white, affluent, poor; one thing that unites us all -- one thing all Democrats, nay, all Americans, have in common -- is that we all think Mark Penn is an asshole.

Let the healing begin!

Immediately after I hit "Post" (of course!) over there, I realized that I should have added "Obama supporters or Clinton supporters" to my roll call at the front of the first sentence. Probably after the semi-colon, with another semi-colon after it. So consider it added here.

On the other hand, I figure that even without that rhetorical flourish, it's a pretty good comment when you consider that I — literally — wrote it while sitting on the toilet (hey, what can I say — the XO laptop is really portable!).


by Ray Radlein on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:53:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh my (2.00 / 1)

I think her early team tried to make her "look and act like a polished winner" which just made her stiff and awkward.  When she started acting like herself, joking and grinning etc. then and only then did she look like a winner.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:25:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw, BPK, I really liked your diary. (none / 0)

But I can tell you'll come around. ;)


by The Distillery on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:34:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

I understand your pain and respect it.
I think it is just the realization that it just isn't going to happen. I can only imagine being in your position and I hope you will cheer up.

If that makes you feel better, part of why tonight was so significant is that it is now clear that, even counting the contested FL and MI results and popular vote counts that seem to be important to you, she wouldn't be able to catch up in either pledged delegates or popular vote count.

And I agree the process is weird but that's what it was this year. Let's hope we can get a better system for 2016.


by Benjaminomeara on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:22:01 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

They should count MI/FL no matter what.  Not at 50/50 either, because a 50/50 vote is a 100% nullified voice.

Then any victory will be legitimate beyond question.

Plus I don't want to wake up and look in the mirror this summer and wonder, "How many more times is my favorite candidate going to lose because they don't count the FRIGGIN votes in Florida!"  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:28:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

As an Obama supporter, I felt the same way after Texas/Ohio and after Pennsylvania.  Just like NC for Clinton, polls in those states weeks before the election showed Obama getting trounced.  But, then he closed the gap so well that I started to hope he would win.  Then, he underperforms expectations (but really does no worse than he's always done in states with their demographics) and the media narrative is devestating.  I know that's probably cold comfort, but I was struck by the similarity to your feelings.


John McCain vows to overturn Roe
by soccerandpolitics on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:48:02 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

Thank you.  

I fell for the front that Obama supporters kept putting on that "OH, TX, PA didn't matter" and that they were 100% cool with it.  

I guess we all have the same worries and hopes and insecurities for our candidate.  


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:41:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

I'm sorry -

But there is not likely to be a West Virginia next week.
It's over.
HRC needed another 10-point win in Indiana and had to keep it close in NC.
She didn't.

Long before next Tuesday, the super delegates will have moved into Obama's column and the powers that be will have called on Clinton to concede.  I suspect, also, that some deal will be arranged to pay off any outstanding campaign debt - IF - she withdraws.

That is politics.
Again, I am sorry.


by johnnygunn on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:49:49 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 2)

I know how hard it is to put your heart and soul into a candidate only to see them lose. Although I was not a Clinton supporter (far from it), I do think, though, that Clinton's candidacy has been a very important step forward for our country. Because of the road that she has paved, other women will find an easier path to the highest offices in America, even the presidency. I believe with all of my heart that we will see a female president in my lifetime, and I believe Clinton's historic candidacy has made that possible. You may not have won today, but you have helped other women win tomorrow. I hope that is some consolation.


by Zoey on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:55:05 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

Thank you.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 04:42:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (2.00 / 1)

I felt horrible the whole night. I still do. I support Obama, but I just feel sad now. My sister loves Hillary.

The peoople on either side who live such isolated lives that no one in their immediate circle supports the other candidate...well, they're lucky.

In my family, when either Obama or Clinton lose a primary, you can almost feel the "Mighty Casey has struck out" pall in the air. Tonight, both sides of my family lost one.


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:05:08 AM EST

Not a fan of either, but (none / 0)

I feel what you are saying.  I thought she would lose even bigger in NC and I thought she would eek out a win in Indiana.  Those were my April 20th thoughts and in many ways, she exceeded them.  But the narrative tonight from every channel was "this is over!"  I think it's just fatigue and reality setting in.

Honestly, even if she had "only" lost NC by 5-6 points, I think the media spin would be accelerating her out of the race.

I think the race was over after Wisconsin, from a media narrative standpoint, but Clinton's wins in some key areas were attractive headlines.


by reggie44pride on Wed May 07, 2008 at 05:37:54 AM EST

Re: Honestly, Why Did This *Feel* So Bad? (none / 0)

Obama had a good night last night. And he is to be congratulated on his solid win in NC.

But the effect on the media was no doubt amplified by the campaign's manipulation of the election results by their allies in Gary.  By holding up the Lake County results nearly 3 hours, and then releasing (in order)  the County results that were most favorable, then less favorable, then least favorable to Obama, they controlled the media for the night and even into the morning papers.  Rather than everybody talking about a "split decision" (albeit one more favorable to Obama), they were talking all night about his big victory in NC and an uncertain outcome in IN.


by markjay on Wed May 07, 2008 at 06:26:15 AM EST

Great point (none / 0)

And the tone in the media is so different today than it was last night.  They're talking about Puerto Rico.

I think you're absolutely right that having this Indiana uncertain cliffhanger killed the mood all night.  Plus, early votes were heavily Obama in NC so when NC reported it was this massive 24% spread.  

Lake County was really messed up.  The mayor of Gary was evasive and incoherent.  

Whoa, now Hillary's doing an unscheduled campaign event...?

All the clips they're showing from last night paint Hillary in the most positive light.  

And who benefits from this emotional tug of war?  The media.  It's like they're trying to set us up for a "Shocking comeback" in West Virginia when all of us online already know what the deal is there.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Wed May 07, 2008 at 06:51:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Expectations are set by Pollsters (none / 0)

Expectations are set much, much more by the pollsters that any talking heads.

in this equation, pollsters set expectations, and talking heads follow, not the other way around.

for example, New Hampshire.  It's wasn't the Associated Press or Concord Monitor or CNN who set expectations, it was the pollsters.  When Hill's own internal polls showed her down by 10 pts, the media expectation of a loss, followed.

I saw this because when you look at reputable polls, like SUSA who performed so well on super tuesday, they had a mere 5 pt lead for Obama in NC, with 5 percent undecided.  InsiderAdvantage, a poll Jerome vouched for, had a similar tight survey.  So when results come in, and they don't match, then everyone's psychology is shaken - even among those without a dog in the hunt.

Can you blame the MSM or even Hill's supporters for feeling this way.  It's no different than New Hampshire.  Expectations were set by polling, and when the returns contradict those marks, people with either be exuberant, if the surprise is in their favor, or depressed in the opposite.

Same thing in Indiana.  

SUSA has squandered the well earned reputation the y made on Super Tuesday.  Not only did they call a tight race in NC, but the called a 12 point Clinton victory in Indiana.  

That's why people were bummed.  They looked at the poll and sad to themselves, "hey these guys nailed OH and CA and NJ, and PA, etc, so Clinton will likely win IN by atleast double-digits."  

That's why they felt let-down.  That's why Hillary felt let-down.  They're only human.  They were expecting a cake walk, not a dog fight.    


"McSame: He's Constipated and Ready to GO!
by Al Rodgers on Wed May 07, 2008 at 03:49:02 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.